Trump the Ideologue?

It might be cathartic to call Donald Trump an idiot, but the implications of his presidency are serious. If Trump’s progressive opponents fail to engage with the forces that drove his victory – in particular, the backlash against neoliberalism – not even impeachment may be enough to save the world from a dangerous new ideology.

LONDON – Historians may come to see the American actor Alec Baldwin as US President Donald Trump’s most useful ally. Baldwin’s frequent and widely viewed impersonations of Trump on the comedy show “Saturday Night Live” turn Trumpism into a farce, blinding the president’s political opponents to the seriousness of his ideology.

Of course, politicians are parodied all the time. But with Trump, there is already a tendency not to take his politics seriously. The form of those politics – unhinged tweet-storms, bald-faced lies, racist and misogynistic pronouncements, and blatant nepotism – is so bizarre and repugnant to the bureaucratic class that it can overshadow the substance.

Trump was able to recognise the problems of his base supporters and make grand promises to fix them as well as making America great again. He has not however, given answers on how he is going to solve them. When he was elected I wrote two words on a piece of paper which is sealed in an envelope extremely dangerous. So far it still holds.

One might have hoped that some "serious analysis" would have commenced among conservatives after the massive disasters of the George W. Bush administration Clarrie Kay -- but instead, the right seems to have doubled down on its commitment to avoiding reason altogether in favor of an "alternative facts" approach. Like the one that gave us, to site an early example, the invasion of Iraq and now promises to "solve Korea."

Useful article. But every progressive analysis, including ALL the 100+ carried by the Project Syndicate, is distracted by the analyst's perceived obligation to descend to abusive language and expressions of disgust. Without such virtue signalling, the analysis would risk being categorised as deplorable and dismissed out of hand.

The result of this all-pervasive groupthink is that readers of all progressive organs are left mystified regarding the tenets of Trumpism. They put his election down to black magic and comfortable themselves that this too will pass. At least one more electoral defeat will be necessary before serious analysis will even commence within the progressive/academic community.

Curtis Leonard may find it useful to remember that the appropriate historical moments for comparison with the current Trump phenomenon is in fact not across the pond. The rise of the Know-Nothing party in the mid-19th century focused upon anti-Catholic/anti-immigrant themes and occurred in a very polarized America as it headed towards the Civil War. Trump's campaign reformulated the bigoted rhetoric of the mid-19th century in a polarized environment today. A major constitutional crisis may yet be in the making.

Mark Leonard says Trump may be a buffoon, and not an "ideologue," but he has zealous and doctrinaire supporters who are "ready and willing to define Trumpism for him. Front and center is Stephen Bannon." Urging Trump's opponents not to be blinded by Alex Baldwin's farcical impersonations of the occupant of the White House, the author maintains "the implications of his presidency are serious."
There's another political figure in history - Margaret Thatcher - who had been underestimated by the British elites, and the political establishment had "learned the lesson the hard way." The author points out "powerful parallels between the late 1970s and the present. Just as Thatcher recognized growing dissatisfaction with the old order and gave voice to ideas that had been languishing on the margins, Trump has acknowledged and, to some extent, vindicated the anguish and anger of a large segment of the working class who are fed up with long-established systems."
In 1975 not many people believed that Margaret Thatcher would be as serious a threat to Labour as she later became, and many MPs had underrated her influence throughout her leadership. They failed to perceive her "revolutionary politics that reflected and accelerated fundamental social and economic changes," except for a far-left magazine "Marxism Today." The author says "left-wing figures saw what those in the mainstream didn’t."
Thatcher's concept of free market economy enabled thousands of tenants buying their council flats and houses, eagerly snapping up shares in the newly privatised industries such as British Gas and British Telecom. Millions of people who previously had little or no stake in the economy found themselves being able to buy and own. Yet she presided over a gigantic credit boom, that empowered casino capitalism. Even though she sought to roll back the state, public spending rose in all but two of her years in office. The year Britain ran a trade surplus was when it waged the Falklands war in 1982.
Trump doesn't come anywhere near Thatcher. She - with a degree in chemistry and law - was intelligent, well-briefed and committed. She was disciplined and didn't tolerate nonsense. Adopting the persona of a housewife politician, she extolled thrift and hated profligacy. He - a former real estate tycoon - cultivates a larger-than-life persona and loves bling and opulence. Thatcher, like Trump, "was no philosopher," but her conviction politics, economic, social policy and political style did "attract people capable of refining /her/ ideology and policy program that would eventually bear her name" - Thatcherism.
Trump and Thatcher do share a few character traits, despite their differences. In her third term hubris and power hunger proved her undoing and her strengths became her weaknesses. She was ideological, patriotic and so uncompromising that she always felt certain she was right, making her unpopular in Brussels. Her close friendship with Ronald Reagan, who shared many of her economic views, and her special relationship with Mikhail Gorbachev were unique, allowing her to write history. The objective record was never as perfect or as planned as many of her supporters liked to believe. Nevertheless she was, after Clement Attlee, the best post-war prime minister in Britain.
Trump, due to his incomopetence and shortcomings, relies heavily on Steve Bannon, an alt-right Svengali, his daughter and son-in-law, to prop him up. Investigations into his team's link to Russia cast a shadow over his presidency. The author says, "Trump’s opponents, who are still a long way from recognizing the ideological implications of his presidency" have to wake up and "engage seriously with the forces that Trump’s victory reflected and reinforced – in particular, the backlash against neoliberalism." Even if he were removed from office, the author doesn't believe that it "will be enough to put the Trumpian genie back in its bottle."
What is exactly Trumpism? Bannon's perception has three key elements: economic nationalism, controlled borders and a foreign policy that put American interests first. In March 2016 Mitt Romney said: "Today, there is a contest between Trumpism and Republicanism....Through the calculated statements of its leader, Trumpism has become associated with racism, misogyny, bigotry, xenophobia, vulgarity and, most recently, threats and violence. I am repulsed by each and every one of these."
While Trumpism may just be a transient phenomenon, Thatcherism wrote history and changed Britain's face. Her monetary policies made the City of London one of the most vibrant and successful financial centres in the world.Much of these benefits are under threat after Brtiain decided to leave the EU.

Dreadful. Thatcher, like Enoch Powell, rose from the Provincial lower middle class thanks to her brains and talent. She was a barrister, a professional politician, and read Hayek. Trump is a businessman who has never held any sort of public office. He is attractive precisely because he, unlike Hillary, is happy to extend the Obama doctrine- viz. America's diplomatic playbook consists of doing stupid shit- to its logical, not ideological, conclusion.
If America signals it will only act according to its national self-interest- but will sell protection- then both the Globe and the World Economy are stabilised. It was the pretence that America had an ideology- that 'it would bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend & c'- which led to America 'doing stupid shit'.
Nixon tried to roll back on the 'stupid shit'. He also tried to fix things in America so the 'Southern Strategy' was broadened to include the 'flyover' White Working Class through cash transfers and a free Health Service. He had no support in his own party. There was a reason for his paranoia.
Thatcher, at one point, could have gone down the early Keith Joseph road- i.e. bleeding heart stupidity. Thankfully, she got labelled a 'milk snatcher'. Since Thatcher had grown up in modest circumstances she could afford to go down a different road. True, she wasn't a mathematical economist. But then, most mathematical economists back then were- as they still are- quite worthless.
Thatcher, as a middle class 'striver'- along with Tebbit- could, after some initial jitters and infelicities, take an 'ideological' turn precisely because ideology isn't an upper class commodity. It is declasse.

How ridiculous is it to quote Martin Jacques to us today- Brexit day- of all days? He was a lightweight back in the Seventies and he stopped mattering at all a very long time ago. I do remember him. He had a book out the year after I left the LSE and started work in the City. It was worthless. Thatcher, at the time, had committed to an utterly foolish monetary policy. That wasn't 'ideology'. It was stupidity. We know a lot about how and why Thatcher became the Iron Lady. Her Hayekian instincts were right but the fashionable Douglas Jay Friedmanism was just an availability cascade she, like Callaghan, bought into. Once the real exchange rate dropped, Hayekian policies worked and were embraced by 'New' Labour. Sadly, those idiots- Brown had a PhD as worthless as that of Jacques- didn't get that Hayekainism is cool so long as the real exchange rate is low. The Germans, stupid as they are, do get it. Of course, being German, they don't acknowledge their debt to Austrians and talk ideological nonsense about 'Liberal World Orders' and so forth.

Ideology is stupid. It is a honey trap for declasse or deeply provincial people educated beyond their intelligence. No doubt, the great unwashed- and Trump has laved in no grand Alethic stream- may sound ideological from time to time when their dander is up or they are on the make. So what? Sycophants- originally the term meant a sort of informant or bringer of unjust prosecutions- we shall always have with us.
Obama pointed out that America had a very bad playbook which caused it to do stupid shit abroad. What he didn't add was that the Federal Govt. has a very bad playbook which causes it to screw up subsidiarity at home. Trump- provided he does nothing except Tweet- is the ideal King Log the Free World needs.
This isn't ideology. It is common sense.

Finding ideology in a piece of writing requires familiarity with relevant ideas. I don't believe you possess any such familiarity. Thus I dismiss your comment.
I am not ideologically opposed to migration. Few Economists are.

NATODOLLARS and PETRODOLLARS
TRUMP is Nixon 2.0.
Nixon was engulfed by Watergate.
Yet Nixon - plus The genius of Kissinger - created the script, that turned out to be The Shape of The Future.
PetroDollars, The Road to Beijing, The Road to Russia - perhaps The Three Key initiatives, that changed history.

The Three Trumps from Nixon 2.0, perhaps in that order.
The Price of America's Security guarantees will escalate - no free lunches for The Franco-German Commonwealth ( I.e. The EU).
Monetary Myopia that bedevilled Sovereign Economics - will give way to Fiscal departures and Enlargement of Infrastructure Assets.
Russia and China will replace France and Germany - as critical players inside The Top Table.
The Trump Template will add NatoDollars to PetroDollars from the Nixon Template.
Before Trump is overtaken by "His Watergate".

Yes, of course. Your point about DJIA as the yardstick of performance is well taken.
Subjective measurements however, for The State and The CEO, leave too much to judgmental opinions.
The Church historically provided Schools and Hospitals - that domain of Public Goods and Services was the Ground Floor.
The Anglosphere substantially enlarged that domain - Transportation Technology Defense Research Utilities Aerospace et al.
My understanding of Trumponomics - Public Infrastructure Assets will be unleashed funded with Fiscal Policy departures.
There are many measurement yardsticks that potentially could measure The CEO performance.
The DJIA is one amongst several.

Oh dear, Curtis.
If "idiots" become billionaires, get elected democratically, take the Dow past 20000 - they are The Zero needed periodically.
Remember, The Zero - has no value, by itself - but is essential on the Road to Infinity.
In fact, The Zero is The Twin of Infinity.
The Zero is The Truth - that guarantees Infinity.
And the only Infinity is The Trinity.
Looking forward to the Dow go past 30000 - Hillary would struggle with 20000.
JS

Yes, Trump and Bannon are only the diseased political "skin" that covers a large portion of the American body politic.

Rather than confront their own inadequacies in a complex global economy and political landscape, Trump's supporters want to blame "the system" -- which would be OK if they had any constructive ideas to offer about what to replace that system with.

And in the meantime, those same supporters continue to vote for people who are adept a manipulating them, rather than being adept at solving their very real problems. Trumps "wall" is a perfect example of this. Does any thinking person really believe that a wall is going to prevent desperate people from crossing our southern border? As a wag has noted, "So Trump promises to build a wall -- get over it."

Trump will eventually go. But that portion of the American people that pioneered this country and made it what it once was seem to be gone forever. Enjoy the ride down hill.

To Hank Bones:
Your rant appears to have vanished here, but it was so selectively prejudiced that it's probably just as well. To take just the first of your whines: you note that the national debt was doubled under Obama, but you seem to have forgotten (willfully no doubt) that the doubling was in no small measure due to the Great Recession initiated by Clinton and brought to full bloom by George W. Bush.

The rest of your excuses for your Trump vote are equally empty. You don't like the ACA? How did the Republican's AHCA, with its 14% tax give-away to the wealthy sit with you?

You seem also to have erased the fact that the Republican controlled House and Senate, for the majority of the Obama years, dedicated themselves to preventing his administration from getting anything done -- and that they all refused, as a block, to contribute anything to drafting the ACA during Obama's first 18 months.

Your bitterness, aside from contributing nothing to improving matters for the American people, is naive, absurdly selective and misplaced -- and look what you've brought us all as a result. Enjoy the fruits of your labor.

Declaring yourself a victim, Stephen, is certainly easier than taking any degree of personal responsibility for your own life choices and condition. And what about advancing a few constructive ideas that might improve things? Have you stopped buying products made in China? Shopping at Walmart? Joined one of the many activist networks that have emerged since the Trump disaster, like Indivisible?
(See https://www.thenation.com/article/your-guide-to-the-sprawling-new-anti-trump-resistance-movement/ for help.)

In four years, you and many other self-proclaimed "victims" will simply have more to complain about than you do today. And then what? Will you spend more time doing nothing and imagining yourself a 21st century version of a sans-culotte? Please: it becomes tiresome.

So Mr. Carpenter a large portion of the body politic is to accept their sodomization in the name of globalization? Look at what was on offer in the last election.
Donald Trump a liar and a fraud.
Hillary Clinton 4 more years of the same also a liar and a fraud.
Gary Johnson a man who had a very limited platform.
What a choice our political elite put on offer!!!
I voted for Mickey Mouse!
Has for your comment about inadequacies that describes the problem in a nutshell the winners believe that the system is wonderful and Hillary Clinton was the 2nd coming of Jesus.
The losers well we have well and thoroughly done over by a political system whose decisions represent corporate interests & the rich and connected not the voters and everyone knows it.
So the losers voted for a man the elites despised why not they had damn little to lose.
And to paraphrase does any thinking man think this country can continue being run for the benefit the few forever before the losers turn to the gun rather then the worthless ballot box.
Hold the losers of globalization in contempt has you so obviously do Mr. Carpenter but remember so to did the French government hold the people in contempt in 1786. I would really prefer to avoid another Reign of Terror. But if the winners who won courtesy of a bought political class do not share the winnings with the other 90% of the population it isn't if it is when the reign starts again.

In 2008, I voted for Barack Obama. I didn't just vote for him; I attended rallies, and I pitched in to get others to cast their votes for him too. I voted for Barack Obama because he was going to institute transparent government, bring about a balanced budget, fix healthcare, pull us completely out of our idiotic wars in the Middle East, put an end to special interest power over Washington (i.e., he was going to drain the swamp), and because his professed values were centrist - he was to be a post-racial president, and as he noted back then, he did not support same-sex weddings; marriage, he said, is between a man and a woman.

So what did my vote get me?

An even more cryptic, secretive government than was inherited. A more than doubling of the national debt. An absolute disaster of a healthcare bill, that has led to monopolies in a huge number of counties as healthcare companies pull out, and by the end of this year will lead to entire swaths of the nation bereft of health coverage. The toppling of Libya, the attempted toppling of Syria, and the birthing, funding, and wink-and-nod protection of ISIS. Massive refugee flows into Europe that have thrown the continent into chaos, led to widespread sexual assault, robbery, and death, and likely have brought about the end of the European Union.

My vote got me wild amounts of crony capitalism, kickbacks, and corruption throughout the Obama administration. Special interest power ballooned during this period. It certainly did not wane. The swamp overflowed. And of course, Obama changed his mind on being post-racial: investigations into police for doing their jobs, calling a would-be cop killer his 'son', and egging on violent racial protests. Just as he 180'd on gay marriage, on transgenderism... on, frankly, just about everything.

You are right. I, and many other Trump voters, have been manipulated.

But not by Donald Trump.

So far, Trump has taken great pains to do everything he said he would do, and remained laser-focused on ensuring the actions of his presidency match the rhetoric of his campaign.

It was the man we voted for in 2008 who did the manipulating. We voted against him as much as we voted for Donald Trump. The 2016 election was, as that man told us it would be if we voted against his selected inheritor, a repudiation of the last eight years.

You may call us inadequate, uneducated, unthinking, and diseased all you like, but you're not going to get us back on your side again by shaming us. We're fed up with the left's self-righteous, chaos-causing pomp. And with all the broken promises you've generated, all the deaths and destruction your policies have caused in this nation, in the Middle East, and in Europe, all the incessant finger-wagging and tut-tutting you do, we don't see your side as righteous anymore. It's impossible to see your side as righteous anymore. All it looks to be is corrupt.

What a sad story in US politics! where Trump turns out to be the least qualified of all Presidents in the past six decades as I know. Bernie Sanders correctly described him as a " pathological lier" and not an idealogue!
Please read: http://reviewcanada.ca/magazine/2017/04/the-age-of-offence/. For a nuanced portrayal!

In these pages some months ago I complained when the estimable Prof. Skidelsky used the term 'Trumpism' as if it were a proper noun, noting that it was in essence an advertising campaign. Political platforms generally have that character, you'd suppose, but Marks' rendition of Bannons' purely tactical approach involves lumpen nationalism rather than 'a system of ideas', except about how to enflame, amplify and exploit 'authoritarian' instincts, which, sad to say, is the career path of people like Limbaugh, Murdoch, Ailes, FOX, CNBC and Bannon, and for them business as usual. Trumps' career, which would deeply embarrass anyone here in northern California, previously played on low-end popular aspirations rather than frustrations. But these innate nationalistic reflexes of often ill-informed middle america have been conditioned by generations of such rightist manipulators-for-profit, and amplified by cultural dynamics described by the author Robert Frank and others. It seems to me that the overall situation doesn't have much to do with ideology, but rather with an approach more akin to animal husbandry. We're talking frankfurters here, not Frankfort School.

Most Trump voters voted against arrogant liberals. They voted against being made fun of on Saturday Night Live, John Steward, Steven Colbert... while being poilitically ignored and insulted. Liberals stopped talking about issues years ago and today their intellectual leaders are comedians whose skill is making fun of people.
The divisiveness that you are so afraid that the left is missing is the arrogance to think you can make fun of people to cover up your failures. You know, like you did in this article.

New Comment

Pin comment to this paragraph

After posting your comment, you’ll have a ten-minute window to make any edits. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.

Log in/Register

Please log in or register to continue. Registration is free and requires only your email address.

Log in

Register

Emailrequired

PasswordrequiredRemember me?

Please enter your email address and click on the reset-password button. If your email exists in our system, we'll send you an email with a link to reset your password. Please note that the link will expire twenty-four hours after the email is sent. If you can't find this email, please check your spam folder.